
Author . 



Title 



Imprint. 



18—47372-2 QPO 



w 





SPEECH 



WILLIAM H. SEWARD, 



AGAINST THE 



AEMED INTERYENTION OF RUSSIA 



HUNGARIAN REVOLUTION. 



,' " Nature and Laws would be in an ill ease, if Slavery should find what to 
'sdytoT itself, and Liberty be mute ; and if tyrants should find men to plead 
for them, and they that can waste and vanquish tyrants, should not be able 
to find advocates." — Milton. 



IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 9, 1852. 



THIRD EDITION. " 



WASHINGTON : 

BUELL & BLANCH ARD, PRINTERS. 

1852. 



» STilCTja!i'l'-'aiTnVn 1 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/speechofwilliamh05sewa 



?^^~ 



SPEECH 



AGAINST THE 



.15 




AEMED INTEEVEiVTION OE EUSSIA 



I?/ 



HUNGARIAN REVOLUTION. 



" Nature and Laws would be in an ill ease, if Slavery should find what to 
say for itself, and Liberty bo mute ; and if tyrants should find men to plead 
for them, and they that can waste and vanquish tyrants, should not be able 
to find advocates." — Milton. 



IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MAECH 9, 1852, 



THIRD EDITION, 



^i 



WASHINGTON : 

BUELL & BLANCIIAPtD, PRINTERS. 

1853. 



SPEECH. 



The question was on the foHovving resohitions, submitted by 
Mr. Seward as a substitute for resolutions introduced by the Hon. 
Mr. Clarke, of Rhode Island: 

Resolved, That while the United States, in consideration of the exigencies 
of society, habitually recognise Governments de facto in other States, yet 
that they are nevertheless by no means indifierent when such a Govern- 
ment is established against the consent of any people by usurpation or by 
armed intervention of foreign States or Nations. 

Resolved, That, considering that the people of Hungary, in the exercise 
of the right secured to them by the Laws of Nations, in a solemn and 
legitimate manner asserted their national independence, and established 
a Government by their own voluntary act, and successfully maintained it 
against all opposition by parties lawfully interested in the question ; and 
that the Emperor of Russia, without just or lawful right, invaded Hun- 
gary, and, by fraud and armed force, subverted the national independence 
and political constitution thus established, and thereby reduced that coun- 
try to the condition of a province ruled by a foreign Power ; the United 
States, in defence of theu' own interests, and of the common interests of 
mankind, do solemnly protest against the conduct of Russia on that occa- 
sion, as a wanton and tyrannical infraction of the Laws of Nations ; and 
the United States do further declare that they will not hereafter be indif- 
ferent to similar acts of national injustice, oppression, and usurpation? 
whenever or wherever they may occur. 

Mr. SEWARD rose and said: 

Mr. President: Writers on law teach us that States are Free, 
Independent, and Equal Moral Persons, existing for the objects of 
Happiness and Usefulness, and possessing Rights and subject to 
Duties defined by the Law of Nature, which is a system of pol- 
itics and morals founded in right reason ; that the only difference 
between Politics and Morals is, that one regulates the operations 
of Government, while the other directs the conduct of individuals, 
and that tlie maxims of both are the same ; that two sovereign 
States maybe subject to one Prince, and yet be mutually inde- 



pendent ; that a nation becomes free by the act of its Ruler when 
he exceeds the fundamental laws; that when any Power, whether 
domestic or foreign, attempts to deprive a State of independence 
or of liberty, it may lawfully take counsel of its courage, and prefer 
before the certainty of servitude the chances of destruction ; that 
each nation is bound to do to every other in time of peace the most 
good, and in time of war the least harm possible, consistently with 
Its own real interests ; that while this is an imperfect obligation, 
of which no State can exact a performance, any one has nevertheless 
a right to use peaceful means, and even force, if necessary, to repress 
a Power that openly violates the Law of Nations, and directly attacks 
their common welfare; and that, although the interests of universal 
society require mutual intercourse between States, yet that inter- 
course can be conducted by those only who in their respective na- 
tions possess and exercise in fact adequate political powers. 

Austria being situated in Central Europe, with only an incon- 
siderable seaport, we have known little of her, except that she was 
one of the oldest and most energetic and inexorable members of 
that combination of States which, under the changing names of 
" The Allied Powers," " The Holy League," and "The Holy Alli- 
ance," and with the unchanging pretence of devotion to Order and 
Religion, have more than half a century opposed and resisted 
everywhere the reforming and benign principles of the American 
Revolution. 

Hungary, after having been in ages past the heroic defender of 
Christian Europe against the armies of Islam, and later the 
chivalrous guardian of Austria from the usurpations of Prussia and 
France, seemed near a century ago to disappear, and only four 
years since came again on the stage, and challenged her part in 
the Drama of Nations. She occupied a region within the Austrian 
Empire with fifteen millions of people, of whom the Magyars, a 
race that had inherited freedom, arts, and arms, were one-third, 
while the remainder were Germans, Serbs, and Wallachians, and 
the two latter classes were debased and virtually enslaved by feudal 
customs and laws. Under the Constitution given to her by an 
ancient King, St. Stephen, Hungary was a limited Monarchy and 
an absolutely independent State. Beginning, however, in 1530, 
she elected for her Kings the successive reigning Dukes of the 
House of Hapsburg Loraine for a period of one hundred and fifty 
years, and then gave them succession to her throne by a law of 
inheritance. Nevertheless, fundamental laws enacted by Hungary. 
and accepted by the Austrian dynasty, defined the union of the 



two States, declaring that the Khig' shonkl have no power before 
coronation, that he could be crowned only on signing a compact 
and swearing an oath to sustain the Constitution, usages, and laws 
of Hungary, by virtue of which she was a free and independent 
State, and that she could be bound by no royal edicts or decrees, 
but only by laws passed by her own Diet or Legislature, and sanc- 
tioned by her King. 

Hungary was always as independent of Russia as we are. 

Such, ]Mr. President, was the condition of Hungary in March, 
1848. Now she has neither Constitution, nor King, nor Diet, nor 
National functions, nor National organs, nor Independence, nor 
Liberty, nor Law, but lies prostrate at the feet of the Austrian Em- 
peror, and receives his absolute decrees from the point of the 
sword. Who has wrought this melancholy and fearful change in 
country that had used its liberty so nobly, and had kept it so long? 
We shall soon see. 

In February, 1848, the Hungarian Diet, while revising and me- 
liorating their domestic laws, learned by the telegraphic wires that 
a Republic had risen in Paris, and that a Constitutional Govern- 
ment w^as about to rise in Vienna. Availing themselves of these • 
propitious circumstances, they decreed the establishment of an 
independent National Treasury, a Resident Palatine or Viceroy, 
and a responsible Hungarian Ministry — institutions equally neces- 
sary, just, and constitutional. Hungary received the royal sanction 
of these measures with contentment and satisfaction at the very 
moment when only her word was wanting to subvert the Empire. 
Three days afterwards, the Germans obtained a Constitution at the 
hands of the Emperor, who thus became a limited monarch in his 
Austrian dominions, as he had always been in Hungary. The 
Hungarian Diet at once reformed the social and political condition 
of the State, and, abolishing Feudalism, but not without just com- 
pensation, they established equality of taxation, representation, 
suffracre and all leo-al riohts among all races and classes through- 
out the Kingdom; and on the 11th of April the Emperor crowned 
this noble and beneficent work by an edict approving and con- 
hrming the new laws, " word for word." 

A party of reaction, not Hungarian, but Austrian, on groundless 
pretences fomented insurrection in the Hungarian Provinces of 
Servia and Wallachia ; and inasmuch as tyranny, when panic 
struck, cannot but be perfidious, the Emperor, violating the Con- 
stitution and laws, appointed the chief instigator, the Baron Jella- 
chich, to the office of Ban or Governor of the seditious districts. 



Hungary remonstrated, and the Emperor disavowed the insurrec- 
tion, denounced and deposed the Ban, and called on the Diet to 
provide by law promptly and effectually for the safety of the King- 
dom. Nevertheless, the traitor, privately assured by the Monarch, 
eiitered the territory of the Magyars with 40,000 men, and, receiv- 
ing there six auxiliary Imperial regiments, proceeded towards the 
Hungarian capital, marking his vvay with inhumanity shocking to 
describe — burying living men, and slaying women without mercy, 
and even children without remorse. In the midst of these terrors, 
the Emperor, the crowned and constitutional King of Hungary, 
rejected the defensive laws which at his own instance the Diet 
had passed, restored to the invading chief his dignities, and, sus- 
pending the fundamental laws, proclaimed him now not merely 
Ban of the insurgent provinces, but Supreme Dictator of all Hun- 
gary. Then rang throughout that land a well-known voice — a 
voice that a tyrant once had stifled for three years in an Austrian 
dungeon, and that in its turn had made that tyrant take refuge 
in the subterranean vaults of Schoenbrunn, and in the mountain 
fastnesses of the Tyrol — a voice that has since been heard by all 
nations. In tones sad yet bold, and in language solemn yet cheer- 
ing and prophetic, it predicted that this treason of the King would 
work out the independence of the Magyar State, and closed with 
the appeal, " To arms ! to arms! every man to arms ! And let the 
women dig a deep grave between Veszprem and Fehervar, in 
which to bury either the name, fame, and nationality of Hungary, 
or our enemy ! " The sons of Attila rose as one man, the Diet 
took its firm resolve, the Ministry executed it, and the Nation or- 
ganized almost in a day and appointed and supplied as soon, by 
the genius which had summoned it to the field, met, defeated, and 
chased the invader to the very walls of Vienna, and there,.sat down 
and waited, unhappily in vain, the concerted rising of the German 
Republicans for the overthrow of the Empire. The Constitutional 
Assembly of Austria, although cheered by popular victories, vacil- 
lated, and then of course cowered, and at last, amid the decimation 
of the patriots, abandoned the easy revolution. Hungary was thus 
left alone. Her constitutional compact and oath embarrassed the 
Emperor. He therefore resigned, and his son, a youth of seven- 
teen, sprang into the throne, spurning the hateful ceremonies of 
a Hungarian coronation, and trampling the Constitution of St. 
Stephen into the earth. Nine armies at once entered Hungary on 
various sides, charged to complete its subjugation by concen- 
tratinnr on the banks of the Theiss. Not one of them reached that 



beautiful river. Ail were assaulted, routed, and repulsed ; and on 
the nineteenth day of April, 1849, only one year after the Nation 
had become free by the act of her Prince, the Diet deposed and 
banished the House of Hapsburg, pronounced the connection 
between Hungary and Austria at an end, and declared Hungary 
an independent State, and committed its Government under due 
responsibilities to its deliverer, Louis Kossuth, as Governor and 
President. Three days afterwards the last of the invading armies 
withdrew, and thus the war ceased, and Hungary was then in fact 
and by success of arms, as well as in law and by the voice of jus- 
tice, independent and free. Nine months later, that independence 
was overthrown by two hundred thousand Russian troops, with 
one hundred and forty thousand Austrian auxiliaries, at the com- 
mand of the Czar, on no better pretext than this: that the suc- 
cessful example of Hungary was dangerous to order and reli- 
gion in Europe. But this was nothing less (in the words of 
Grotius) than " a deprivation " of Hungary of " what belonged to 
her," by Russia, "for her own advantage;" and such acts have 
been universally condemned as criminal by all writers on the Law 
of Nations from the dawn of that science until its present noon. 
When, in this fresh and accumulated invasion and intervention, the 
national armies, not without extraordinary and cheering successes, 
were at last hemmed in and around the national fortresses, and 
there remained only a hope that terms of capitulation might be ob- 
tained, Gorgey, the victorious and popular military chief, became 
contumacious towards the civil authorities. He was deposed, but 
was restored as an indispensable alternative ; and then, holding in 
his own hands the only available means of effective resistance, 
he exacted an absolute dictatorship as a condition of using them. 
Invested with supreme power, he used it to complete a surrender 
of the country in pursuance of previous concert with the enemy, 
without conditions, except in one instance, and without striking a 
b!ow\ The civil leader, with a small but heroic band, escaped into 
Turkey ; and now, after undergoing long surveillance there, restored 
to freedom and activity, he is amongst us, with a soul unsubdued by 
treachery, misfortune, poverty, reproach, and exile, preparing a 
new revolution for his fatherland, which, as soon as it was surren- 
dered to the Czar, was by him delivered over to the Emperor, and 
at once submerged in the Austrian Empire. 

Sir, on the grounds of these principles and these facts I submit 
to the Senate and to the People of the United States that certain 
propositions implied in the Protest offered by the honorable Sen- 



ator from ]\Iichigan, [Mr. Cass,] and fully and distinctly expressed 
in that presented by myself, are established, namely : , r 

1. That the People of Hungary, in the exercise of rights secured to them 
by the Law of Nations, in a solemn and legitimate manner asserted their 
•national independence, and established a Government by their own vol- 
untary act, and successftdly maintained it against all parties lawfully in- 
terested in the question. 

2. That the Emperor of Russia, without just or lawful right, invaded 
Hungary, and by fraud and armed force subverted the national independ- 
ence and political Constitution thus estal)lished, and thereby reduced that 
country to the condition of a Province ruled by a foreign and absolute 
Power. 

3. That although the United States, from the necessities of political soci- 
ety, recognise the existing rule in Hungary, yet they are not indifferent to 
the usurpation and conquest by wliich it was established. 

4. That they may lawfully protest against that conquest and usurpa- 
tion, and against any new armed intervention by Russia to uphold it 
against the will of the People of Hungary, if it shall be expressed. 

Sir, this being the vv'hole of our case, and it being thus estab- 
lished, I ask why shall we not proclaim that just and lawful Pro- 
test ? 

An honorable Senator [Mr. Miller] answers that we shall not 
speak because " the matter is foreign." But how is it foreign ? 
Does it not arise in'Che family of nations, and are we not a member 
of that family, and interested in its welfare, and therefore in the 
laws by which that welfare is secured ? There was a Senate two 
thousand years ago, in which that objection provoked a rebuke from 
one v/ho never indulged a thought of the Republic that was not 
divine. " Haec lex socialis est," said Cicero, " hoc Jus nationum 
exteraruvi est : Hanc habent arcem, minus aliquanto nunc quidem 
mmiitam quam antea ; verwmiamcn, si qua reliqua spes est, quae 
sociorum animos consolari possit, ea iota in hac lege posita est ; 
cujus legis non modo a Populo Romano, sed etiam ab ultimis nation- 
ibus jampridevi severi custodes requiruntur." 

Another Senator [Mr. Clemens] tells us that interest is the first 
law of nations, and that an enlightened sense of interest offers no 
argument for such a course. Sir, granting the extraordinary rule 
thus assumed, the value of the objection depends on what consti- 
tutes an interest. While it is true that this proceeding will not 
be directly compensated by either treasure or territory, it is equally 
clear that we need neither, and that the promise of both would 
constitute no adequate motive. The commerce of Hungary is, 
ho^vever, an interest to be secured by us ; and inconsiderable as it 



must be under a Despotism, it would expand under a Republic. 
But as it is written for individual guidance, "Man shall not live 
by bread alone," so is it true of nations, that riches and aggrandize- 
ment are only means and not objects of Government, and that States 
live and flourish not on merely physical elements, but just in the 
proportion that Law, Order, Peace, Justice, and Liberty, are main- 
tained in the Commonwealth of Nations. What expenses do we 
not incur, what armaments do we not sustain, to protect our 
national rights against apprehended injustice! How much more 
must we not expend, what greater armaments must we not pro- 
vide, if we by silence or pusillanimity encourage attacks on the 
common welfare of nations ! It was this objection that the hon- 
orable and distinguished Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Clat] re- 
proved on an occasion like this in the House of Representatives, 
twenty years ago, when he said : " I see, and I own it with infinite 
regret, a tone and a feeling in tJie councils of the country infinitely 
below that which belongs to the country." Sir, it is enough for 
us if there be a duty, for the great Lawgiver has never subjected 
either individuals or societies to an obligation, without attaching 
to the law a penalty for its neglect, and a reward for its fulfilment. 

It has already appeared that there is a duty resting upon us, un- 
less, indeed, the act proposed would involve an injury to some real 
interest of our own. The question, then, is not, what shall we 
gain, but what shall we lose, by the Protest? In reply to this in- 
quiry, the Senate Chamber and the country resound with alarms 
of war, and we are frightened with estimates of the boundless cost 
of the controversy, and with pictures of its calamities, fearful indeed 
if we are to be overborne, and still more terrible if we shaii come 
off" conquerors. Sir, I need no warnings of that kind. War is so 
incongruous with the dictates of reason, so ferocious, so hazard- 
ous, and so demoralizing, that I will always counsel a trial of 
every other lawful and honorable remedy for injustice, before a 
resort to that extreme measure of redress ; and, indeed, I shall 
never counsel it except on the ground of necessary defence. 

But if war is to follow this Protest, then it must come in some 
way, and by the act of either ourselves or our enemy. But the 
Protest is not a declaration, nor a menace, nor even a pledge 
of war in any contingency. War, then, vv'ill not come in that 
way, nor by or in consequence of our act. If war is nevertheless 
to come, it must come in retaliation of the Protest, and by the act 
of Russia, or of Austria, or of both. Assume now that it shall so 
come, will it be just ? The Protest is a remonstrance addressed 



10 

to the conscience of Russia, and, passing beyond her, carries an 
appeal to the Reason and Justice of Mankind. As by the Munici- 
pal Law no remonstrance or complaint justifies a blow, so by the 
Law of Nations no remonstrance or complaint justifies a war. 
The war then would be unjust, and so the Protest would be not a 
cause, but a pretext. But a nation that will declare war on a pretext 
will either fabricate one or declare war without any. Let no one 
say that I misstate the character of this measure. It is neither un- 
tried nor new. Austria protested against the mission of Dudley 
Mann, and President Taylor's avowal of it. Did we go to war ? 
Did anybody think that we ought or could go to war for that? 
No ! we made a counter protest by the celebrated letter of the 
Secretary of State [Mr. Webster.] Did Austria maintain her 
protest by a declaration of war ? No ; we are at peace with Austria 
yet, and I hope we shall be so forever. And now, honorable Sen- 
ators, I ask, if we are to shrink from this duty through fear of 
unjust retaliation, what duty shall we not shrink from under the 
same motive? And what will be the principle of our policy, 
when thus shrinking from obligations, but Fear instead of Duty ? 

And who are we, and who are Austria and Russia, that v:e 
should fear thevi when on the defence against an unjust war ? 
I admit, and I hope all my countrymen will learn it without a trial, 
that we are not constituted for maintaining long, distant wars of 
conquest or of aggression. But in a defensive war levied against 
us on such a pretext, the reason and the sympathies of mankind 
would be on our side, co-operating with our own instincts of pa- 
triotism and self-preservation. Our enemies would be powerless 
to harm us, and we should be unconquerable. 

Why, then, I ask, shall we refrain from the Protest? The answer 
comes up on all sides. Since, then, the measure is pacific, Russia 
will disregard it, and so it will be useless. Vv^ell, what if it should ? 
It will at least be harmless. But Russia will not disregard it. It is 
true that we once interpleaded between the belligerents of Europe 
twenty-five years by protests and remonstrances in defence of our 
neutral rights, and vindicated them at last by resistance against one 
party, and open, direct war against the other. But all that is 
changed now. Our flag was then a stranger on the seas, our 
principles were then unknown. Now, both are regarded with 
respect and affection by the People of Europe. And that People, 
too, are changed. They are no longer debased and hopeless of 
freedom, but, on the contrary, are waiting impatiently for it, and 
ready to second our expressions of interest in their cause. The 



11 

British nation is not insensible to our emulation. If we only speak 
out, do you think that they would be silent ? No, sir. And 
when the United States and Great Britain should once speak, 
the ever-fraternizing bayonets of the army of France, if need were, 
would open a passage for the voice of that impulsive and generous 
nation. Who believes that Russia, despotic as she is, would 
brave the remonstrances of these three great Powers, sustained as 
they would be by the voice of Christendom ? Sir, I do not know 
that this Protest will do Hungary or European Democracy any 
good. It is enough for me that, like our first of orators [Mr. 
Webster] -in a similar case, I can say, " I hope it may." 

But it is replied that, if our Protest shall be disregarded, we 
must resort to war to maintain it, and that Louis Kossuth has 
confessed so much. I shall not stay long on the quibble of the 
lawyers who claim to have circumvented the guest at the feast to 
which they had bidden him. It was so that some of old sought to 
entangle in constructions of their national traditions the Great 
Teacher, who came, not to dispute with Doctors, but to call all 
men to repentance. This proceeding is mine, not that of the 
Hungarian Neophyte in American politics. It is to be settled 
upon arguments here, not on concessions elsewhere. And now, 
sir, why must we go to war to sustain our Protest ? You may 
say, because we should be dishonored by abandoning an interest 
so solemnly asserted. Sir, those who oppose the Protest are 
willing to forsake the cause of Hungary now. Will it be more 
dishonorable to relinquish it after an earnest effort, than to aban- 
don it without any effort at ail in its behalf? Sir, if it be mere 
honor that is then to prick us on, let the timid give over their fears. 
A really great, enlightened, and Christian nation has just as much 
need to make war on a false point of honor, as a really great, en- 
Hghtened, and Christian man has need to engage in a personal 
contest in the same case ; and that is no necessity at all. Nor 
shall we be reduced to the alternative of war. If Hungary shall 
never rise, there will be no casus belli. If she shall rise, we shall 
have right to choose the time when to recognise her as a nation. 
That recognition, with its political influence and commercial bene- 
fits, will be adequate to prevent or counterbalance Russian inter- 
vention. But I am answered, that we shall unnecessarily offend 
Powers whom it is unvt'ise to provoke. I reply, that it is not 
enough for a nation that it has no enemies. Japan and China are 
in that happy condition. It is necessary that a State should have 
some friends. To us, exemption from hatred obtained by insen- 



12 

sibiiity to crime is of no value ; still less is the security obtained 
by selfishness and isolation. Only generosity ever makes friends, 
and those that it does bring are grateful and enduring. 

Again, then, I ask, why not vindicate the Lavi' of Nations by our 
Protest? One Senator [Mr. Clemens] draws an argument against 
the exercise of national sympathy from the character and conduct 
he imputes to Louis Kossuth, and represents him as having been 
reckless and uncalculating before danger approached, and weak 
and vacillating and shrinking when it v/as coming on ; as having 
abandoned his country while he had yet one hundred and thirty- 
five thousand men ; and as having surrendered the State unneces- 
sarily or unwisely to one who for months he had believed a traitor :, 
and as being, therefore, not a hero ; and, finally, as addicted to 
military display, and irreverent of the ashes of Washington, and 
therefore not a Republican. 

Sir, if these assumptions were as correct and just as it has suf- 
ficiently appeared that they are erroneous, what would they or the 
objection raised upon them have to do here and now ? This is a 
trial of Russia at the bar of the Public Justice of the World, How 
can the verdict be aflTected by any imagined misconduct of Louis 
Kossuth here, after Russian intervention in Hungary was ended, or 
even by any errors or misconduct before, of which Hungary alone, 
not Russia, had right to complain ? The objection is as much out 
of season as out of place. The character of Louis Kossuth was a 
preliminary question, and has been decided by Congress with un- 
exampled unanimity, and by a decree awarding such honors as the 
American People had before found none worthy to receive but the 
constant and generous Lafayette. 

Gods, of whatsoe'er degree, 

Resume not what themselves have given. 

Freedom, sir, often undervalues, and sometimes mistakes, her 
friends ; but Tyranny never is deceived in her enemies. Let the 
honorable Senator from Alabama [Mr. Clemens] convince the 
treacherous Bonaparte that Louis Kossuth is not a man to be 
feared, or the old and subtle Metternich that Louis Kossuth is not 
a man to be hated. Until then, we must stand upon the judgmenj 
we have already rendered. 

Once more, then, I ask, why v.'ithhold our Protest ? The Senator 
from Alabama [Mr. Clemens] would reply, that Hungary is an in- 
tegral part of the Austrian Empire, and that she will be entitled 
to our declaration only when she sholl, by successful revolution; 



13 

have established her independence. The form of iny proposition 
defeats the objection. Hungary had always enjoyed and in that 
very way had re-established her independence when Russia inter- 
vened. Certainly those who maintain that we could not now em- 
ploy force to separate Hungary from Austria, when Russia has 
united them by force, cannot deny our right to protest against the 
crime that Russia thus committed. It would indeed have been 
better to have protested during the period of the act itself. But the 
period was short, and we remote. The act is yet recent, and the 
prospect of a new attempt of Hungary continues the transaction, 
and renders a censure of the past and a protest against the appre- 
hended renewal of Russian intervention important and seasonable. 

There remains the objection, that flows so readily from all con- 
servative pens and tongues on this side of the Atlantic, and still 
more freely from the stipendiary presses of Paris and Vienna, that 
a Protest would be a departure from the traditional policy of our 
country, and from the precepts of Washington. It is passing strange, 
sir, that Louis Napoleon and Francis Joseph should take so deep an 
interest in our adherence to our time-honored principles, and in our 
reverence of the memory of him who inculcated them, not for the 
immunity of tyrants, but for the security of our own welfare. I 
know by hearsay that an association during our last contest with 
Great Britain clothed themselves with these same principles, and 
even with that illustrious name ; that they called themselves the 
"Washington Benevolent Society, celebrated the nativity, and 
quoted the Farewell Address of Washington to embarrass the Ad- 
ministration in what they were pleased to call an unjust and unholy 
war, even when it had become a war of national defence. I have 
known a faction, too, that planted themselves on the same sacred 
text, to confine to persons of American birth the privileges of 
American citizenship. A good cause needs not the sanction of 
that awful name. A bad one often seeks, although it cannot 
justly claim it. Therefore, I always take the liberty to look under- 
neath the mantle of Washington, on whose so ever shoulders I 
find it. 

Sir, granting for a moment that Washington inculcated just such 
a policy as is claimed by my opponents, is it so entirely certain 
that it ought always and under all circumstances to be pursued ? 
Here is a message of his that illustrates the policy he adopted 
towards, not one only, but all the Barbary Powers, and it received, 
I think, the unanimous and fivorable response of the Senate of the 
United States : 



14 

May 8, 1792. 
To the Senate of the United States : 

If the President should conclude a Convention or treaty witli the Gov^ 
ernment of Algiers for the ransom of the thirteen American citizens in 
captivity there, for a sum not exceeding f 40,000, all expenses included, 
will the Senate approve the same "? If the President should conclude a 
treaty with the Government of Algiers, for the establishment of a ■peace 
with them, at an expense not exceeding $25,000, paid at the signature, 
and a like sum to be paid annually afterward during the continuance of 
the treaty, would the Senate approve the same ? 

GEO. WASHINGTON. 

Sir, you and I and all of us would have answered in the affirma- 
tive to these questions, had we lived and occupied these places in 
the last century. I desire to ascertain how many votes such a 
treaty would receive here now? And I address myself to the hon- 
orable Senator from Rhode Island, [Mr. Clarke,] who moved reso- 
lutions a^rainst any departure from the policy of Washington. 
Would you, sir, pay a Barbary Pirate $40,000 to ransom thirteen 
captives? and $25,000 bonus, and $25,000 annually, for exempt 
tion from his depredations.? He looks dissentingly. I appeal to 
tny emulous friend from New Jersey, [Mr. Miller.] Would you, 
sir.'' No, not I. I demand from the other honorable Senator from 
New Jersey, [Mr. Stockton,] who in the triple character of Sena^ 
tor, Commodore, and General, presided at the Birthday Congres- 
sional Banquet in honor of Washington, and dishonor of his Hun- 
garian disciple, Kossuth, Would you, sir .? No, not he. All who 
are in favor of such a treaty, let them say. Aye. What, sir ! not 
one vote in the Senate of the United States for the continuance of 
what was in its time a wise and prudent as well as humane policy 
of Washington ! No, not one. And why, sir ? The answer is 
easy : The times have changed, and we have changed with them. 
No one has ever thought that the Spartans wisely continued the 
military monastery after their State was firmly established. No one 
ever has thought that the Rape of the Sabine women by the Ro- 
mans was a policy to be perpetuated. 

But, sir, to come to that part of Washington's Policy which is 
directly in question. I shall maintain that it was this. It consisted 
in avoiding new entangling alliances and artificial i\es, with one of 
the belligerent Powers in a general European war, but it admitted 
of expressions, assurances, and manifestations of sympathy and of 
interest in behalf of nations contending for the Principles of the 
American Revolution, and of protest, earnest and decided, against 
the intervention of foreign Powers to suppress these principles by 



15 

forces and this, just as I have defined it, is the traditional policy 
of the United States, and has been pursued until this very day 
and this very hour. 

Mr. President : I might well excuse myself from proving the 
truth of this proposition, inasmuch as, on the principles I have 
established, the United States, being a moral person, could not but 
cherish all that devotion to their own just and true system of poli- 
tics which the policy I have described implies ; and being, more- 
over, an enlightened as well as generous Power, tliey could not 
but desire to see it successfully adopted by other nations ; and 
being, finally, a free nation, they could not fail to speak out their 
sympathies with those who might be struggling to adopt it, and to 
utter their indignation at armed intervention by Despotic Powers 
to deprive them of a right so absolute, and of benefits so inesti- 
mable. Least of all could George Washington, the highest human 
personation of justice and benevolence, have inculcated any other 
policy than that which I have described. But the issue is one of 
profound and lasting importance. And therefore History shall 
prove my proposition to be true, and vindicate my country and her 
immortal Founder. 

Political philosophy, as the last century was approaching its 
close, was engaged in an effort to discover the true theory of Gov- 
ernment. The American Revolution terminated the dispute, by 
presenting a practical experiment of a free representative Govern- 
ment, directly established by the People, and depending not merely 
for administration, but for continuance, upon their ever-renewed, 
constant, and direct activity. France, vv'ith mingled motives of 
previous favor to the new system, and of opposition to a hereditary 
rival, had recognised the United States at an early day, and granted 
them seasonable and effective aid, and bound them to her by a 
treaty of mutual and eternal guarantee and alliance. The French 
Revolution of 17S9 was the American Revolution beginning a new 
career in Europe. When, in 1792, a popular Constitution had 
been received by Louis XVI, he announced his acceptance of it 
to the several nations, and with very diflerent results. It roused all 
the Monarchies of Europe, sooner or later, to a mighty and com- 
bined effort for the extinguishment of the Populai' Cause in France, 
as a necessary measure of security to the Ancient System. On the 
contrary, the President of the United States transmitted the virtu- 
ous, but irresolute King's letter to Congress. The House of Rep- 
resentatives, in their reply, assured him of their " sincere participa- 



16 

tion in the interest of the French Nation on that great and im- 
portant event, and of their wish that the wisdom and magnanimity 
displayed in the formation and acceptance of the Constitution 
might be rewarded by the most perfect attainment of its object — - 
the permanent happiness of so great a People." This, sir, was the 
first salutation to Republicanism in Europe by the Government of 
the United States, and it was, in effect, a Protest against the 
Armed Intervention then organizing beyond the Rhine. Sardinia 
and Austria, on the other hand, entered immedialely into a treaty, 
and were soon afterwards followed by Russia, the A^etherlands, and 
Great Britain — and thus was established the first combination, 
under the name of the Allied Powers, to oppose by force the Prin- 
ciples of the American Revolution. To establish this point, it is 
necessary to refer only to Wheaton's History of the Law of Nations : 
" It was an Armed Intervention to restore the ancient order of 
things in France, and against the principles of the French Revo- 
lution, deemed to be of dangerous example and contagious influ- 
ence on the neighboring Monarchies." 

On the 22d of April, 1794, when France had adopted the Repub- 
lican system, and had driven beyond her borders the Allied Powers 
who had entered them to vindicate the cause of the deposed and 
executed monarch, the Committee of Safety, exercising the Exec- 
utive functions of the State, announced by letter to our Congress, 
that "a National Government had been born in France, and with 
it victory ; that internal order had been restored, and that the con- 
spirators against the Republic had fallen;" and they declared their 
desire to "draw closer than ever before the bonds of friendship 
which united the French Nation and the United States." Tlie 
Senate, in reply, assured the Committee of Safety of their "friend- 
ship and good will for the French Republic," and the House of 
Representatives declared themselves duly impressed "by the friend- 
ly and affectionate manner in which they had been addressed," 
and tendered " an unequivocal assurance that the Representatives 
of the People of the United States had much interest in the hap- 
piness and prosperity of the French Republic." 

The question of a closer political alliance and of more intimate 
artificial ties with France, thus presented formally by the Commit- 
tee of Safety, was urged upon Washington with discourtesy and 
vehemence by agents of that nation. He met it promptly, and 
denied it emphatically, by the Proclamation of September, 1794, in 
which he declared that, in compliance with duty and interest, the 



17 

United States would assume and maintain a neutral attitude in 
the war then raging in Europe. Disappointed as France was, 
the Convention of that Republic nevertheless within six months 
afterwards ordered the American flag to be displayed as a symbol 
of their principles in the Hall of their debates, and received it, 
when presented for that purpose by the American Minister, with 
enthusiastic demonstrations of respect and fraternal affection 
towards the American People. 

Sixteen months after the date of the Proclamation, and while it 
continued to regulate the action of the Government, Washington 
received the French Minister, Adet, with a letter from the Commit- 
tee of Safety, and the tri-colored standard of the French Republic, 
on the first day of the new year— a day specially appointed, be- 
cause it was a day of general joy and congratulation. The Com- 
mittee by that letter informed the United States that they had 
received, with rapture, assurances of sympathy, which had been 
given to them by the American Minister in, Paris and added that 
they were well av/are that the United States truly understood that 
the victories of the French strengthened their own independence 
and happiness. Washington replied, that " his anxious recollec- * 
tions, his sympathetic feelings, and his best wishes, were irresisti- 
bly excited whenever he saw in any country an oppressed nation 
unfurl the banner of freedom ; and that, above ail, the events of* 
the French Revolution had produced in him the deepest solicitude 
as well as the highest admiration." Rising into a tone of earnest- 
ness and enthusiasm, unusual with that seemingly imperturbable 
Magistrate, he added: 

" I rejoice that the interesting revolutionary movements of so many years 
have issued m the formation of a Constitution designed to giv® permanency 
to the great object for which you have contended. I rejoice that Liberiy, 
of which jou have been the invariable defenders, now finds an asylum in 
the bosom of a regularly organized Government — a Government wliich, 
being formed to secure the happiness of the French People, corresponds 
with the ardent wishes of my heart, while it gratifies the pride of every 
citizen of the United States by its resemblance to their own. May the 
friendship of the two Republics be commensurate with their existence." 

The Senate on that occasion declared that they "united with 
Vv'ashington in all the feelings he had so ardently and so sublimely 
expressed." The scene in the House of Representatives was 
among the most inspiring ever exhibited in the Natal Halls of 
American Independenc-e. On taking the Chair, the Speaker an- 



18 

noUj^cgjj to the House that they would receive a communication 
which would excite the most pleasing satisfaction in every 
American heart, and cautioned the Representatives and the Peo- 
ple in attendance to confine the fervor of their enthusiasm within 
the restraints of propriety and dignity. Washington's message 
was read, the colors of the French Nation were received and 
unfurled, the Letter of the Committee of Safety was submitted and 
considered, and thereupon the Representatives unanimously re- 
solved, amid acclamations in and around the Chamber, that they 
" received the communication of France with sincere and lively 
sensibility, and that they deemed the presentation of the colors 
of the French Republic a most honorable testimony of the existing 
sympathy and affections of the two Republics, founded on their 
solid and reciprocal interests, and that they rejoiced in the oppor- 
tunity of congratulating the French Republic on the brilliant and 
glorious achievements accomplished under it, and that they hoped 
that those acnievements would be attended with a perfect attain- 
ment of their objects — -the Liberty and Happiness of that great 
People.' Sir, were not these ceremonies a demonstration of 
sympathy with Democracy in Europe ? The victories thus cele- 
brated were won from the Allied Powers combined to oppress 
France by force. Were not these ceremonies a protest against 
their unlawful intervention ? 

Nevertheless, the United States persevered in the course marked 
out by the Proclamation ; and Washington, in his Farewell Ad- 
dress, published a year later, declared, in language truly quoted 
here, that the great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign 
nations v/as in extending our commercial relations to have as little 
political ©onnection with them as possible, and to avoid implica- 
ting ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of Eu- 
ropean politics, and in the ordinary combinations and collisions 
@f national friendships and enmities. Sir, that policy was neces- 
sary, and for that reason, if for no other, was wise. The flames 
of war raged throughout V/estern Europe, and its lurid blaze 
lighted up the Ocean. Both the belligerents recklessly turned 
Pirates, and supplied themselves by the robbery of our unarmed^ 
unprotected merchant vessels. Great Britain still, in violation of 
the recent treaty of peace, held the military posts on our Western 
borders, and had control of the passions of the savages amongst 
and around us, and was only waiting a pretext for a decisive blow 
at our newly-acquired independence; and France was seeking at 



19 

the same time to involve us in the strife, and to force us to give 
the pretext. Nevertheless, impatient as she was for our co-opera- 
tion, she was herself deranged and disorganized, adopting every 
year a new Constitution, and nearly every month taking for her 
Executive organ some new and more reckless and ferocious cabal, 
and thus was unable to assure us against the treachery of her own 
domestic factions. Well did JelTerson, Secretary of State to Wash- 
ington, while defending the policy of his immortal Chief, declare 
that if the United States " had panted for war as much as ancient 
Rome — if their armies had been as effective as those of Prussia — 
if their coffers had been full and their debts annihilated" — even 
then peace would have been too precious to have been put at 
hazard against odds so fearful, with an ally more dangerous than 
the enemy. And what was the condition of the United States, 
that they should have periled all in the domestic fury of France, 
or on the angry tide of her foreign conflicts? An infant country, 
sunk deep in debt, without any land' or naval force, with an armed 
enemy on her borders, and from necessity paying tribute at the 
same time to the African Corsairs ; nay, worse — unable to obtain 
their forbearance, because unsuccessful in borrowing funds to pay 
the tribute money. What less than madness would it have been 
to have entered into closer alliance, and to have assumed more in- 
timate ties with a nation whom they could not have aided, and 
in going to whose help they would have been certain to have 
perished. Salus Populi est mprevia lex. Neutrality was a neces- 
sity, and therefore a duty. 

I admit that the policy of the Proclamation was continued 
throughout the whole war, until its close in 1814. Yes ; and I 
confess, moreover, that congratulations and protests ceased with 
the last imposing ceremony I have described. But the explana- 
tion of both of these facts is at hand. The jealousy of the Bel- 
ligerents did not abate, and the parties changed objects and char- 
acters. When France was well nigh exhausted by Factions, the 
Republic went down, and in its place arose, of course, a Dictator, 
and afterwards an Empire. She who had at first taken arras in 
defence of national rights against external intervention, afterwards 
carried war into the bosoms of the intervening States who now 
resisted their late enemy to save Europe from an armed Military 
Despotism. The United States had no longer a cause in Europe 
to congratulate, to protect, or to defend. 

But the American Revolution broke out soon in another region. 



20 

As early as 1810, the Spanish Provinces of South Amenca declared 
their iridependence, and resorted to arms with briihant success. 
The Allied Powers of Europe, flushed with the recent triumph over 
Napoleon, frowned on the new Western Republics. The United 
States held at first a subdued tone, in consequence of severe expe- 
rience in their war with England then just closed. Nevertheless, 
they regarded the controversy between the Colonies and Spain, 
not as an ordinary insurrection, but as a civil war between parties 
nearly equal ; Vk'hile the President, Monroe, asked Congress for a 
law to render the neutrality code more stringent. The design was 
alleged to be to prevent the departure of ships built at Baltimore 
for the new States. This policy was too cold and prudent for the 
great popular Leader in that day in the House of Representatives, 
[Mr. Clay.] He proclaimed that the President, in his anxiety to 
stand erect, leaned against Freedom ; and, alluding to Spain and 
the Holy League as oppressors of South America, he declared 
"he had no sympathy with tyrants." The President dispatched 
commissioners to seek information of the condition and prospects 
of the insurgents, just as President Taylor recently did in behalf 
of Hungary, and with the same object. But the great exponent 
of American Republicanism was not satisfied, and he thereupon 
moved in the House of Representatives an appropriation for a 
direct embassy to the Republic of the Rio de La Plata.^ In sup- 
port of that motion, he demanded, with noble, spirit-stirring vehe- 
mence : "Are we not bound upon our own principles to acknowl- 
edge the new Republic? li'we do not, who will? Are we to expect 
that Kings will set us the example of acknowledging the only 
Republic on earth except our own ?" 

A year later, the President, Monroe, taking bolder ground, inti- 
mated to Congress and to the world quite distinctly the interest 
with which the United States regarded the consultations of the 
Holy League. After saying, in the courtly language of diplomacy, 
that they had undertaken to mediate between Spain and her Colo- 
nies, he expressed a very confident belief that they would confine 
their interposition to the expression of their sentiments, abstaining 
from force. What was this, sir, but an expression of sympathy 
with the Republics, and a Protest against Armed Intervention by 
the Holy League of Europe? 

One more year ripened these sentiments into action. " It is 
not in the power of a virtuous People," said the President, " to 
behold a conflict so vitally important to their neighbors without the 



21 

sensibility and sympathy naturally belonging to -such a cause." 
And after announcing that he had tried to engage the co-operation 
of other Powers to influence Spain, he added, certainly very much 
in the spirit of the present proceedings, that, "should it become 
manifest to the world that the efforts of the parent State to subdue 
the Colonies would be fruitless, it might be presumed that she 
would relinquish them." 

The House of Representatives, either thinking that the probable 
issue was already manifest, or unwilling to wait for the permission 
of other Powers, at once replied to the President, that they were 
even then ready to provide for diplomatic relations with the new 
Republics; and they tendered to him their constitutional support 
of a recognition of them whenever he should be pleased to grant it. 
They marked this decisive declaration by the unusual formality of 
sending a committee to announce their determinations to the Pres- 
ident, at the head of which was justly placed the now distinguished 
Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. Clay.] A medal commemorating 
the civic achievements of that eminent Leader has been recently 
struck. One of its inscriptions recites this great triumph in beha.lf 
of Freedom in South America. Sir, in my judgment, it was the 
noblest of them all. 

Long after the recognition of the South American Republics, the 
Holy League continued to entertain the appeal of Spain for their 
intervention. But the spiiit of the American People would no 
longer brook such an unlawful act. In 1823, the President [Mon- 
roe] atoned for all past hesitation by that decisive and memorable 
protest, in which, after urging the inapplicability of the principles 
before held by our Government on the subject of intervention to 
the case of the South American States, he avowed that it " was 
due to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the 
United States and the Allied Powers of Europe, to declare that we 
should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system 
to any part of this hemisphere as dangerous to our own peace and 

safety And that, while we should still remain neutral in 

the contest, our position would change if their intervention should 
render it necessary." 

The Holy League, nevertheless, kept on secretly consulting on 
mediation with the sword for the good of the People of this Con- 
tinent, until John Quincy Adams, President, not appreciating their 
benevolence nor having the fear of force before his eyes, accepted 
for the United States, v/ith the support of Congress, an invitation 



22 

to attend a meeting of the new brotherhood of American Repub- 
lics, called to discuss measures for the common safety and welfare. 
While explaining the reasons for that measure, that incorruptible 
and indomitable Magistrate thus renewed the protest of his Prede- 
cessor : 

"To the question, 'Whether the Congress of Panama, and the principles 
which may be adjusted by it. may not give umbrage to the Holy Leagua 
of European Powers, or offence to Spain,' it is a sufficient answer, that it 
can give no just cause of umbrage or offence to either, and that the United 
States will stipulate nothing there which shall give such just cause. Here 
the right of inquiry into our purposes and measures must stop. The fear 
of giving umbrage to the Holy League of Europe was urged as a motive 
for denying to the American nations the acknowledgment of their inde- 
pendence. That it would be viewed by Spain as hostile to her was not 
only urged, but directly declared by herself The Congress and the Ad- 
ministration of that day consulted their rights and duties, and not their 
fears. Neither the Representation of the United States at Panama, nor 
any measure to which their assent may be yielded there, will give to the 
Holy League, or any of its members, or to Spain, the right to take offence. 
For the rest, the United States must still, as heretofore, take counsel from 
their duties, not their fears." 

And now, sir, the scene changes once more to Europe. Two 
thousand years ago, mercurial, vivacious, spiritual Greece, after 
continued and restless activity, fell asleep, and during her long 
slumber the False Prophet of the Koran bound her limbs with hate- 
ful and corroding chains. Within our day she moved, and awaked, 
and rose from the earth, and seized and attempted to break the 
instruments of her bondage. It was the Spirit of the American 
Eevolution, passing by, that roused her from that lethargy to that 
noble achievement. The Holy League of Europe, that had tram- 
pled Freedom beneath their feet in France, and menaced it so 
long in South America, consulted how to crush it in the Land of 
Homer and Pericles and Alcibiades. Greece, confined within her 
miniature islands and her narrow peninsTila, was to us a strangei, 
a shadow of a name, knovv^n to us only by her primitive instructions 
in all philosophy, by her perfection in all ennobling arts, and by 
her nursing care of our Holy Religion. But for all that we were 
not indifferent ; and although Despotic Europe offered to unite 
Vv'ith Superstitious and Despotic Asia for her subjugation, v/e were 
encouraged by the humane sympathies of the world, and did not 
quite fear to speak out. "It is impossible," said the President, 
[Monroe,] " to look to the oppressions of Greece without being 



23 

deeply affected. A strong hope is entertained that that People 
will secure their independent name and their equal standing among 
the nations of the earth. From the facts which have come to our 
knowledge, there is good cause to believe that the Enemy has lost 
all dominion over them, and that Greece will become an inde- 
pendent nation. That she may obtain that rank, is the object of 
our wishes." This expression of sympathy for Greece, and this 
protest against the cruelty and oppression of her tyrant, was 
reiterated every year until, by the armed intervention of other gen- 
erous Powers, their object, the emancipation of that People, was 
obtained. Who can say now how much they did not contribute 
towards that gratifying result? 

Mr. President: just after the revolution of France in 1830,1 had 
the honor to visit Lafayette in La Grange. The porch of his 
chateau was ornamented with two brass field-pieces, captured 
from the Army of Charles X by the Citizens of Paris, and pre- 
sented to its noble proprietor. The hall of entrance was deco- 
rated with the mingled drapery of the tri-colored flag of his own 
country and the stars and stripes of ours. And there he Vv'as in 
retirement, cheerful and hopeful, although disgusted by the treach- 
ery of the Citizen King against the principles of the American 
Revolution, to which he owed his throne. " Sir," said Lafayette, 
"Louis Philippe will be King some seventeen or eighteen years ; 
but no son of his will ever sit on a throne in France." That 
longest period had not elapsed v/hen the throne in the Tuilleries 
disappeared, and the false Monarch was an Exile in England. We 
all recollect that the American Minister, without waiting for a per- 
manent organization of the nation, or for instructions from home, 
or for intelligence of the dispositions of the Monarchs of Europe, 
hastened to intervene and commit his country by saluting the new 
Republic. The President [Polk] acted with equal promptness and 
decision. 

"The world [said lie to Congress] has seldom witnessed a scene more 
interesting and sublime than the peaceful rising of the French People, 
resolved to secure to themselves enlarged liberty, and to assert, in the 
majesty of their strength, the great truth, that in this enlightened age 
man is capable of governing himself The prompt recognition of her new 
Government by the representative of the United States meets my full and 
unqualified approbation. The policy of the United States has ever been 
that of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of other countries — leaving 
each to establish the form of Government of their own choice. While this 
wise policy will be maintained towards France, now suddenly transformed 



24 

from a Monarchy into a Republic, all our sj^mpathies are naturally enlist- 
ed on the side of a great People, who, imitating our example, have resolv- 
ed to be free Our ardent and sincere congratulations are extended 

to the patriotic People of France, upon their noble and thus far successful 
efforts to found for their future government liberal institutions similar to 
our own." 

Congress echoed tliese just sentiments, and in the name and 
behalf of the American People " tendered their congratulations to 
the People of France upon the success of their recent efforts to 
consolidate the principles of Liberty in a Republican form of 
Government." 

Mr. President: a spark from tlie flame, which thus breaking out 
in Paris was regarded with so much pleasure here, kindled the 
material which had been long gathered and prepared by Louis 
Kossuth and his compatriots in Hungary. Remote as we were, 
we watched and followed the revolution in that ancient country 
with intense interest. We had an agent there ready to tender our 
congratulations; but the cause went down under the iron pressure 
of Russian Intervention. When we could do no more, we sought 
the exiled Chief in Turkey, procured his release from duress and 
surveillance ; and while the Russian and Austrian monarchs, with 
menaces, demanded his surrender to them by the Ottoman, we 
brought him, with the ovation of a Conqueror, under protection of 
our flag, down the Mediterranean, and home to our own shores, 
and received him with honors that have divided the homage of 
mankind between ourselves and him. 

Sir, even while this slow and languid debate has been going on, 
we have interceded — informally, indeed, but nevertheless we have 
interceded — with Great Britain for clemency to imprisoned patriots 
who, under auspices hopeless, but under the pressure of national 
evils quite intolerable, had attempted to renew the American Rev- 
olution in Ireland. And you and I, and every Senator here, 
whether he suppresses utterance as some may do, or speaks out as 
I do, is earnestly hoping that that act of intercession may prevail 
with the amiable and virtuous Monarch who wields a benignant 
sceptre over those realms. 

Here, sir, the history ends. I will add no glosses to the recital. 
I will not attempt to simplify the subject, involved as it is in the 
confusion resulting from the want of definitions of intervention, 
and from the neglect to discriminate between intervention in the 
domestic affairs of a nation and opposition against the flagrant act 



of a strong foreign Power in attacking without just cause or motive 
a weak but brave one struggling with its proper enemy. I shall 
not ask the Senate or the country to distinguish between interces- 
sion, solicitation, or protest, on the one side, and armed interven- 
tion, entangling alliances, and artificial ties, on the other. I will 
only say that either this Protest is not an Intervention, or we have 
done little else than to intervene in every contest for Freedom and 
Humanity throughout the world since we became a nation, That 
if this act be wrong, we have never done right. If we approve and 
own the precedents of our predecessors, this act is one which can- 
not be justly or wisely omitted. The question before us, then, is 
not whether we shall depart from our traditional policy, but 
whether we shall adhere to it. 

Inasmuch as some will say that I have presented, in too strong 
relief, the action of the Government in behalf of freedom, I call 
now on those who maintain that its policy has been one of indif- 
ereilce, to show one act that the United States ever committed, 
one word that they ever spake, or one thought that they ever 
indulged, of congratulation, of sympathy, or even of toleration, 
towards a falling despotism or a successful usurpation. 

Having vindicated my country and her statesmen against tlie 
implications of indifference, coldness, and isolation, I hope it will 
not now be thought presumptuous on my part, or irreverent to the 
memory of Washington, or dangerous to the State, if I inquire on 
what principle the duty of neutrality v;as founded by that illustrious 
man, and whether he enjoined that policy as one of absolute and 
perpetual obligation? "The duty of holding a neutral conduct," 
said he, in his Farewell Address, " may be inferred without any- 
thing more from the obligation which justice and humanity impose 
on every nation in cases in which it is free to act to maintain 
inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations." 
Our "freedom," in that case, resulted from the circumstances 
which excused us from co-operating with France, notwithstanding 
our treaty of alliance; and the exercise of "justice and humanity" 
was in favor of our own People. " The inducements of interest 
for observing that conduct (said he) will best be referred to your 
own reflections and experience. With me, a predominant motive 
has been to endeavor to gain time to settle and mature its yet re- 
cent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that 
degree of strength and constancy which is necessary to give it, 
humanly speaking, the command of its own fortune." 



26 

I will not venture on such a question as whether Humanity and 
Justice may not, in some contingencies, require that we should 
afford substantial aid to nations as weak as we were in our Revo- 
lutionary contest when we shall have matured our strength. Nor 
will I inquire whether time enough has not been already gained to 
give us, speaking always with a due sense of dependence on an 
ever-gracious Providence, the command of our own fortune. 

It is clear enough, however, that we distrust our strength sel- 
dom, except when such diffidence will serve as a plea for the non- 
performance of some obligation of justice or of humanity. But it 
is not necessary to press such inquiries. What is demanded here 
is not any part of our fifty millions of annual revenue, nor any use 
of our credit, nor any employment of our army or of our navy, but 
simply the exercise of our free right of speech. If we are not 
strong enough now to dare to speak, shall we be bolder when we 
become stronger? If we are never to speak out, for what were 
national lungs given us ? 

Senators and Representatives of America, if I may borrow the 
tone of that sturdy Republican, John Milton, I would have you 
consider what nation it is of which you are Governors — a nation 
quick and vigorous of thought, free and bold in speech, prompt 
and resolute in action, and just and generous in purpose — a nation 
existing for something, and designed for something more than 
indifference and inertness in times of universal speculation and 
activity. Why else was this nation chosen, that " out of her, as 
out of Sinai, should be proclaimed and sounded forth the first 
tidings and trumpet" of political reformation to all nations. I 
would have you remember that the love of liberty is a public 
affection which this nation has deeply imbibed and has effectually 
diffused throughout the world ; and that she cannot now suppress 
it, nor smother her desires to promote that glorious cause, for it is 
her own cause. 

Mr. President: I thought that after answering the objections 
against this Protest, I v/ould show affirmatively why it ought to be 
adopted. But vv-ith the disappearance of opposing arguments, the 
reasons in favor of it have risen v/ith sufficient distinctness into 
view. I will only add that it is time to protest. The new out- 
works of our system of politics in Europe have all been carried 
away. Republicanism has now no abiding place there, except 
on the rock of San Marino and in the mountain home of William 
Tell. France and Austria are said to be conspiring to expel 



27 

it even there. In my inmost heart, I could almost bid them dare 
to try an experiment which would arouse the Nations of Europe 
to resist the commission of a crime so flagrant and so bold. 

I have heard frequently here and elsewhere that we can promote 
the cause of freedom and humanity only by our example, and it is 
most true. But wliat should that example be but that of perform- 
ing not one national duty only, but all national duties; not those 
beginning and ending vvith ourselves only, but those also which 
we owe to other nations and to all mankind. No dim eclipse 
will suffice to illuminate a benighted world. 

I have the common pride of every American in the aggrandize- 
ment of my country. No effort of mine to promote it, by just 
and lawful means, ever was or ever will be withheld. Our flag, 
when it rises to the topmast or the turret of an enemy's ship or 
fortress, excites in me a pleasure as sincere as in any other man. 
And yet I have seen that flag on two occasions when it awakened 
even more intense gratification. One was when it entered the city 
of Cork, covering supplies for a chivalrous and generous but fam- 
ishing people. The other was when it recently protected in his 
emigration an exile of whom Continental Europe was unworthy, 
and to whom she had denied a refuge. Sir, it raised no surprise 
and excited no regret in me to see that Exile and that flag alike 
saluted and honored by the People, and alike feared and hated by 
the Kings of Europe. 

Let others employ themselves in devising new ligaments to bind 
these States together. They shall have my respect for their patriot- 
ism and their zeal. For myself, I am content with the old ones 
just as I find them. I believe that the Union is founded in physi- 
cal, moral, and political necessities, which demand one Govern- 
ment, and would endure no divided States; that it is impregnable, 
therefore, equally to force or to faction ; that Secession is a fever- 
ish dream, and Disunion an unreal and passing chimera; and that, 
for weal or woe, for liberty or servitude, this great country is one 
and inseparable. I believe, also, that it is Righteousness, not 
greatness, that exalteth a nation, and that it is Liberty, not repose, 
that renders national existence worth possessing. Let me, then, 
perform my humble part in the service of the Republic, by cultiva- 
ting the sense of Justice and the love of Liberty which are the 
elements of its being, and by developing their saving influences, 
not only in our domestic conduct, but in our foreign conduct also, 
and in our social intercourse with all other States and Nations. 



28 

' It has already come to this— that whenever in any country an 
advocate of Freedom, by the changes of fortune, is driven into 
Exile, he hastens to seek an asylum here , that whenever a hero 
falls in the cause of Freedom on any of her battle-fields, his eyes 
involuntarily turn towards us, and he commits that cause with a 
confiding trust to our sympathy and our care. Never, sir, as we 
value the security of our own freedom, or the welfare and happiness 
of mankind, or tlie favor of Heaven, that has enabled us to protect 
both, let that Exile be inhospitably repulsed. Never let the prayer 
of that dying hero fall on ears unused to hear, or spend itself 
upon hearts that refuse to be moved. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 329 130 



